Carter R. Gilbert

A list of the freshwater fishes of Maryland and Delaware

The only publications attempting to list the species of fishes known to inhabit Maryland and Delaware (Uhler and Lugger 1876, 1877; Fowler 1911; Truitt, Bean, and Fowler 1929) are now outdated. Musick (1972) listed the fishes known from the Chesapeake Bay and adjacent Coastal Plain tributaries, and Mansueti (1957) and Davis (1973) provided keys to the freshwater fishes expected in Maryland. Although there are numerous references to various freshwater fishes in this area, there has been no recent effort to provide a documented list of the species known from these states. We are presently compiling information on the freshwater fishes of Maryland and Delaware (descriptions, distributions, ecology, and zoogeography). The following lists are based on this work. Table I includes all

Two New Genera and Species of Western Atlantic Gobiid Fishes with Vomerine Teeth

Palatogobius paradoxus and Vomerogobius flavus, two new genera and species of western Atlantic Gobiidae, are described and figured. The new taxa are characterized by the presence of vomerine teeth, which until now have been reported only in a relatively few Indo-Pacific goby genera. Despite the common dental characters, Palatogobius and Vomerogobius apparently are not closely related, differing, among other things, in numbers of fin rays (of which the dorsal spines are most significant), morphology of the cephalic lateralis system, and degree of squamation. Palatogobius is known from three specimens from the Virgin Islands and Caribbean Sea, taken at depths of from 21 to 71 m (70-234 ft). It is considered to be most closely related to the new-world genera Microgobius and Bollmannia, although its relationships to these two genera do not appear particularly intimate. Vomerogobius is known from 11 specimens from the Bahamas, collected at depths of from 30 to 42 m (100-140 ft). Its exact relationships are unknown.

Taxonomic and Nomenclatural Status of the Banded Topminnow, Fundulus cingulatus (Cyprinodontiformes: Cyprinodontidae)

banded topminnow. The holotype is identified as a lined topminnow, F. lineolatus (Agassiz), and thus F. cingulatus becomes a senior synonym of that species. Although the original description of F. cingulatus initially appears to be in disagreement with this determination, reasons are presented to explain this apparent conflict. To stabilize nomenclature, a petition will be submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, requesting that the name cingulatus be ruled unavailable in the genus Fundulus. Zygonectes rubrifrons Jordan and Zygonectes auroguttatus Hay have long been considered junior synonyms of F. cingulatus (auct.). We concur but also note that the original descriptions of both forms are complex and appear to be based in part on the golden topminnow, F. chrysotus. Although both species are included among the three extant syntypes of Z. rubrifrons, the two remaining syntypes (of the original eight) of Z. auroguttatus are both banded topminnows. Lectotypes are designated for both species. Ongoing taxonomic studies on the banded topminnow indicate that western and eastern populations are distinguished by nonoverlapping genotype distribution for several allozyme loci, by two independent cephalic pore counts, and by color in adult males. Western individuals have six pores in the preopercular series and have both pores 5 and 6 present in the supraorbital series; eastern individuals have five pores in the preopercular series and only pore 6 present in the supraorbital series. Although the two forms have yet to be found living sympatrically, each has been identified in collections from closely adjacent areas of the Santa Fe River system (Suwannee River drainage), in northeastern Florida. We conclude that the banded topminnow comprises two species, of which the western species should be called F. auroguttatus and the eastern one F. rubrifrons.

New Seventh Edition of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes: Changes include capitalization of common names

New Seventh Edition of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes: Changes include capitalization of common names Lawrence M. Page a , Hector Espinosa-Perez b , Lloyd T. Findley c , Carter R. Gilbert d , Robert N. Lea e , Nicholas E. Mandrak f & Richard L. Mayden g a Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611 E-mail: b Instituto de Biologia, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Apartado Postal 70-153, Ciudad Universitaria, Tercer Circuito Exterior s/n, Distrito Federal 04510, Mexico c Centro de Investigacion en Alimentacion y Desarrollo, A.C.-Coordinacion Guaymas, Carretera al Varadero Nacional, km. 6.6, Colonia Las Playitas, Apartado Postal 284, Guaymas, Sonora, 85480, Mexico d Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, (Retired), Gainesville, FL, 32611 e California Academy of Sciences, 55 Music Concourse Drive, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, CA, 94118 f Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Burlington, Ontario, L7R 4A6, Canada g Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, 63103 Published online: 15 Apr 2013.

Variation in Western Atlantic Gobiid Fishes of the Genus Evermannichthys

Examination of collections of Evermannichthys metzelaari from Isla de Providencia, in the western Caribbean Sea, showed one individual (out of a total of 59) that was unique in having no obvious pigmentation pattern, as well as a higher dorsal-spine count (7) and lower total vertebral count (33) than previously recorded for this species. Analysis of the remaining Providencia specimens showed three others to have the same vertebral count and two specimens examined from Belize were found to have a pigmentation pattern even more obscure than the unique Providencia individual. These factors, together with the wide variation in dorsal-spine count (3-6) previously demonstrated for E. metzelaari, indicate that the specimen in question is merely an unusually variable individual of this species and not an undescribed form as first suspected. The largest Providencia specimen measured only 17.4 mm standard length, which is less than many specimens of E. metzelaari previously examined (mostly from the Bahamas) and is substantially less than for the largest recorded individual (27.6 mm SL). A smaller maximum body size is indicated for the Providencia population. The zoogeography and evolution of the genus Evermannichthys are discussed, specifically with regard to the two most common and widespread species, E. metzelaari and E. spongicola. The apparent absence of this genus from the eastern Pacific region is also discussed, as well as the lack of documented occurrence of any fish species from massive sponges elsewhere around the world.

Corrections to 'Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico'

Errors in Nelson et al. (2004) that have come to our attention are listed below. Some of these were caught in page proof but not changed in the final publication. Corrections to scientific names follow those given in Eschmeyer (1998, Online). Some minor typographical errors that should not cause confusion are not listed in the table below. For example, we place a comma between the name of the author and the date, as given in examples in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 4 Edition (e.g., Article 22A.2, a recommendation concerning method of citation); however, there is the occasional omission of the comma in the list (e.g., ‘‘Narcine bancroftii (Griffith & Smith 1834)’’ and ‘‘Psenes sio Haedrich 1970’’). Other minor errors are the omission of a space between items in ‘‘Squalus mitsukurii Jordan & Snyder,1903’’, extra space between items in ‘‘Cichlasoma deppii (Heckel, 1840)’’, and omission of comma between items, e.g., ‘‘Atherinidae–En-Old World silversides, Sptinicalos Fr-atherines’’. In the Index, page 283, carpio is listed in error as in Cyprinella, rather than Cyprinus. Apart from the errors corrected here, changes found subsequent to finalizing the 2004 list will be published later. This will include many range extensions of species found in our area, taxonomic changes (e.g., modifications in generic and family limits as well as species status), and new species and higher taxa described since the publication of the sixth edition, along with other changes. Other comments or purported errors came forth from users that resulted from not reading the notes in Appendix 1. Except for the entry ‘‘Elassoma okefenokee’’, we do not give comments here from publications, either those we missed or that appeared subsequent to the sixth edition, that either strengthen decisions made for the 2004 list or that present elaboration of comments. These may be presented in future articles or in the next edition, planned for 2010. Users should note that active taxonomic work often results in differences of opinion on the generic placement of many species (many such differences, when timely communicated for the 2004 list, were mentioned in Appendix 1). Generic allocation of several species are not necessarily changed in the main list to follow the latest taxonomic suggestions when there is reason to believe that these actions are likely to soon change (this has often been done with the advice of specialists of the particular group). The scientific name is intended as a recommendation or guide for the non-taxonomist until more comprehensive revisionary works are completed. We plan to issue regular updates on new species to our area and have Web-site access for these updates. List and explanation of corrections for the main list and Appendix 1. Changes are coded as follows: A 5 authority; C 5 common name; CS 5 change in symbol; D 5 date of name publication; F 5 family; O 5 country of occurrence; PA 5 parentheses added; PD 5 parentheses deleted; S 5 spelling of specific or generic name; + Comment in Appendix 1. Corrected entry listing given here is how we propose to list the taxon in the next (7) edition, except for special notes in brackets ([ ]), planned for publication in 2010 (page numbers here refer to the 6 edition). The changes in common names, however, are deemed to be effective now. Explanation of corrections: Page 189. Euprotomicrus bispinatus. Correction of family placement to Dalatiidae from Etmopteridae. Page 195. Ophichthus frontalis. Parentheses are removed from the author’s name. Page 196. Anchoa exigua. Parentheses were inadvertently omitted from the author’s name; this species was described in Stolephorus. Page 197. Chanos chanos. Change in diacritic mark in spelling of author (Forsskal versus Forsskal). Page 201. Oregonichthys crameri. Formerly recognized as including O. kalawatseti. See O. kalawatseti. Page 206. Noturus baileyi. Common name capitalized as it referred to the Smoky Mountains, from which area the species was described as noted in the 1970 edition. We assume the listing as ‘‘smoky madtom’’ in the 1980 and 1991 editions was an inadvertent error. Page 206. Sciadeops troschelii. Correction of spelling of specific name (from troschellii). Page 206. Sciades hymenorrhinos. Correction of spelling of specific name (from hymenorrhinus). Page 213. Ogilbia ventralis. Parentheses were inadvertently omitted from the author’s name; this species was described in Brosmophycis. Copeia, 2006(3), pp. 559–562

Designation of a neotype for the kyphosid fish Kyphosus sectatrix (Linnaeus, 1758)

Several major systematic papers have recently been published on the perciform fish family Kyphosidae. One is a world revision of the family by Knudsen and Clements (2013), based largely on information summarized from an unpublished molecular phylogenetic analysis, supplemented by meristic and morphometric data. The second, by Sakai and Nakabo (2014), is a review of the genus Kyphosus from the Atlantic and eastern Pacific oceans only, based solely on conventional morphological and meristic information. The two papers include disagreements regarding identifications of two jointly examined specimens, erroneous or misleading information relative to types and type terminology, and conflicting meristic data. All of these have important taxonomic and nomenclatural implications, especially as regards Kyphosus sectatrix . Finally, the two studies were conducted completely independent of one another, and this is reflected both in the treatment of species and in certain of the respective conclusions.

THE LIVING MARINE RESOURCES OF THE WESTERN CENTRAL ATLANTIC

• 3 volumes, 2,127 pages, fully indexed. • 84 contributing authors. • Nearly 1200 species accounts each with species illustration and distribution map. • Includes Molluscs, Crustaceans, Fishes, Sea Turtles and Marine Mammals. • All 262 families of fishes occurring in the region covered! • Information on habitat, biology, fisheries, and general distribution. • Illustrated technical terms and measurements. • Illustrated keys to species. NOW available: SPECIES IDENTIFICATION GUIDE